Bell Airacuda

[Jschmus]

I've been poring through my old Bill Gunston book of American warplanes, copyright 1980-something.  I picked up this book back in high school.  It was my first introduction to a wide variety of types I was previously unaware of, including the Bell YFM-1 Airacuda.  For those who don't know, the Airacuda was Bell's first airplane, a company-funded multi-place bomber-destroyer.  It was a big twin with pusher props and manned(!) 37mm cannon in front of the engine nacelles.  

There were numerous problems with the prototypes: underpowered, cooling problems with pusher engine mountings, safety issues (how were the gunners supposed to bail out ahead of the engines?), etc.  Bell built twelve prototypes, one of which was converted to tricycle landing gear.  The AAC flew a test unit with the prototypes, but the unit never reached operational status.  The Army never assigned the type a proper P- designation, and the bomber destroyer concept was eventually invalidated during World War II.

What if Bell and the Army stuck with the 'Cuda through its developmental issues? The original engines are replaced with license-built Merlina.  Big underwing scoop radiators are added for cooling purposes.  The original manned gun positions are faired over, and the cannon relocated to the nose.  Bell enters their redesigned heavy fighter in the competition against Lockheed's XP-38.  The Army designation is XP-52 (a real designation applied to a Bell twin-boom pusher paper design).  The P-38 wins the initial competition, but with the onset of the War, the AAF needs all the fighters it can get, and the P-52 is pressed into service, possibly as a radar-equipped night fighter (think P-70 Havoc).

I really like this idea, and I think it's one of my better thought-out whiff concepts.  Is there a kit anywhere?

[Nigel Bunker]

I think Rareplanes made a 1/72 vac-form of one. But I don't think there was an injection moulded one - not so far anyway.

[upnorth]

Screw the old Rareplanes kit!

Looks like we're expecting one from Valom fairly soon according to Hannants:

http://www.hannants.co.uk/search/?FULL=VAL72015

[Son of Damian]

I saw one at a model show two years ago, but I can remember the name of the company. I believe that it was one of those limited edition resin kits.

[Nigel Bunker]

Screw the old Rareplanes kit!

I think that's unfair. Gordon Stevens made some excellent vac-forms, and unlike some other manufacturers, fuselage halves, wing halves, etc. were normally in alignment.

[upnorth]

Screw the old Rareplanes kit!

I think that's unfair. Gordon Stevens made some excellent vac-forms, and unlike some other manufacturers, fuselage halves, wing halves, etc. were normally in alignment.

I wasn't really aiming at Rareplanes or any other specific vac form outfit.

Its just that, given the option, I'll take injection molded over vac form.

[elmayerle]

Isn't there a company doing a resin kit of one?  I seem to remember it as something like "FE Resins".

[Bluesteel]

Isn't there a company doing a resin kit of one?  I seem to remember it as something like "FE Resins".

Yes FE do one in resin.

http://www.hannants.co.uk/search/?FULL=FER72017

And Rareplanes did one in vacform - it's featured in the first ever modelling book I bought for £1.50 in 1974 'How to Make Model Aircraft' by Chris Ellis, on page 70. It looks splendid.


Bluesteel

[GTX]

Jschmus,

Getting back to your concept - would you also put some guns (preferably large honking cannon or maybe a bank or 50 cals (ala the B-25 pick below - but times two!)) in the front of the engine nacelles?  These could probably be fixed to fire forwards only but would also greatly increase the available firepower.



Slighly off topic, but I've often wondered how the Airacuda would have gone as a ground attack aircraft - say the concept was rejected as a bomber destroyer but still selected as army co-op/support?

Regards,

Greg

[Jschmus]

GTX,

Sounds good to me!  With banks of .50s in the front of the engine nacelles, there'd be no need for "package guns" on the sides of the nose (as in B-25, B-26, A-26, etc).  On the other hand, that could make for some ridiculous advertising: The Bell P-52E, Now with more machine guns than a B-17!    

[Alvis 3.1]

On a similar note, I'm nearing completion of a similar styled aircraft. I recently revisited some Airacuda info for pusher configuration, and went with the faired in gun nosed nacelles. Parallel thinking strikes again!


Alvis 3.1

[jcf]

Interesting idea J, but putting Merlins in the Airacuda would have made no difference...it was a pig aerodynamically and a piss-poor flying machine. Mating the Merlin with the Mustang airframe produced an excellent aircraft because of the potential inherent in the basic design...something that does not apply to the Airacuda.
Also there would not have been Merlins to spare in the time period you posit for a fly-off against the XP-38 (1938-39) and they certainly wouldn't be license built versions as Packard wasn't licensed until 1941 and full production didn't begin until 1942. At any rate the Merlins that were commonly available contemporaneously with the Airacuda were 1,030 hp engines...the supercharged Allison V-1710-23s in the YFM-1 were 1,150 hp (the XP-38 was also powered by 1,150 hp V-1710s). The first of the two-stage engines, the Merlin X, started coming on in late 1938 but its rating of 1,145 hp was still less than the engines already used on the Airacuda and its highly doubtful that there would have been any engines to "spare" for US projects. The Merlin wasn't magic, a fact amply demonstrated by the Merlin powered P-40s.

The YFM-1 Airacuda has always been a favourite because its high weirdness quotient...but even the folks at Bell admitted it was a dog.

Now, following Greg's lead, as a heavy attack aircraft with later series turbo-supercharged V-1710s optimized for low level...

Cheers, Jon

p.s. Lockheed's XFM-2 design lost out to the Bell XFM-1design in the 1936 bomber-destroyer design contest, but because the brass were impressed by what they saw Lockheed was invited to tender a design for the Army's upcoming high-altitude fighter contest...their winning entry was, of course, the P-38.

[NARSES2]

I've got the FE Resin kit and am waiting with baited breath for the Valom one    

[elmayerle]

p.s. Lockheed's XFM-2 design lost out to the Bell XFM-1design in the 1936 bomber-destroyer design contest, but because the brass were impressed by what they saw Lockheed was invited to tender a design for the Army's upcoming high-altitude fighter contest...their winning entry was, of course, the P-38.

Personally, I think, from what I've read, that Lockheed's YFM-2 design was probably the better design.  If I remember correctly, some design elements from that effort showed up on the Neptune.

[Mossie]

I've seen references to a Bell Model 9 that was entered into the competition along with the Douglas Model 7 (A-20 Havoc) North American NA-40 (eventually evolved into the B-25), Stearman X-100/XA-21, Martin Model 167F XA-22 (became the Maryland).  Does any one have any details on the Model 9?  On what little I can find, it was based on the Airacuda but the deisgn was pulled out of the competition before any hardware could be produced.  Not even the hallowed Secret Projects can help!